Edmunds.com: Evo vs. STi
Dec 11, 2007, 04:03 AM
#1
Newbie
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Glenville
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Edmunds.com: Evo vs. STi
here's a comparison on edmunds.com: Title Fight. both cars are JDM spec.
Last edited by deegers82; Dec 11, 2007 at 04:05 AM.
Dec 11, 2007, 04:15 AM
#2
Very interesting. Is Edmunds saying that we are getting a more powerful version than Japan?
"This turbocharged 2.0-liter inline-4 produces 276 hp at 6,500 rpm (the U.S. version is expected to produce 295 hp), and it makes 300 lb-ft of torque at 4,000 rpm. Thanks to the close-ratio gearbox, the Evo X gets to 60 mph in 4.9 seconds."
4.9 is MUCH better than the 5.3-5.4 we've been reading about.
"This turbocharged 2.0-liter inline-4 produces 276 hp at 6,500 rpm (the U.S. version is expected to produce 295 hp), and it makes 300 lb-ft of torque at 4,000 rpm. Thanks to the close-ratio gearbox, the Evo X gets to 60 mph in 4.9 seconds."
4.9 is MUCH better than the 5.3-5.4 we've been reading about.
Dec 11, 2007, 04:53 AM
#4
Evolving Member
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Boston
Posts: 129
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Edmunds says that its 0-60mph times for the STi are from the manufacturer; are we sure that the Evo X's 4.9 to 60 mph is not a manufacturer supplied time as well?
Dec 11, 2007, 05:40 AM
#5
Newbie
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Orlando
Posts: 41
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
4.9 does sound MUCH better but. . .doesn't that still refer to the JDM version?
These cars are out in less than a month and a half in this country, why can't these car publications test the US spec instead of repetitly testing the JDM? They could have just waited about a month and done a true test!
"The Evo X's close-ratio manual gearbox is clearly meant to be the racer's choice, because 5th gear is so tall it's only usable for highway cruising, and it handicaps the Mitsubishi against the Subaru."
The Evo X has so many aspects about it that just make me shake my head and wonder why oh why in the world would Mitsu make it like this instead of doing what makes sense?
"It's not an easy choice. Who would you pick as your bodyguard: Jean-Claude Van Damme or Jet Li?"
haha Edmunds. . .are you serious, anyone who picks Jean Claude Van Damme is a RETARD
These cars are out in less than a month and a half in this country, why can't these car publications test the US spec instead of repetitly testing the JDM? They could have just waited about a month and done a true test!
"The Evo X's close-ratio manual gearbox is clearly meant to be the racer's choice, because 5th gear is so tall it's only usable for highway cruising, and it handicaps the Mitsubishi against the Subaru."
The Evo X has so many aspects about it that just make me shake my head and wonder why oh why in the world would Mitsu make it like this instead of doing what makes sense?
"It's not an easy choice. Who would you pick as your bodyguard: Jean-Claude Van Damme or Jet Li?"
haha Edmunds. . .are you serious, anyone who picks Jean Claude Van Damme is a RETARD
Last edited by LivinJUGGERNAUT; Dec 11, 2007 at 05:57 AM.
Dec 11, 2007, 06:03 AM
#6
Evolved Member
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Diamond Bar, California
Posts: 3,783
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
4.9 does sound MUCH better but. . .doesn't that still refer to the JDM version?
These cars are out in less than a month and a half in this country, why can't these car publications test the US spec instead of repetitly testing the JDM? They could have just waited about a month and done a true test!
"The Evo X's close-ratio manual gearbox is clearly meant to be the racer's choice, because 5th gear is so tall it's only usable for highway cruising, and it handicaps the Mitsubishi against the Subaru."
The Evo X has so many aspects about it that just make me shake my head and wonder why oh why in the world would Mitsu make it like this instead of doing what makes sense?
These cars are out in less than a month and a half in this country, why can't these car publications test the US spec instead of repetitly testing the JDM? They could have just waited about a month and done a true test!
"The Evo X's close-ratio manual gearbox is clearly meant to be the racer's choice, because 5th gear is so tall it's only usable for highway cruising, and it handicaps the Mitsubishi against the Subaru."
The Evo X has so many aspects about it that just make me shake my head and wonder why oh why in the world would Mitsu make it like this instead of doing what makes sense?
Last edited by 3000ways; Dec 11, 2007 at 06:28 AM.
Dec 11, 2007, 06:19 AM
#7
Evolving Member
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Earth
Posts: 347
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
4.9 is very good....I don't really care if the X is slower or faster than previous generations, As long as it can beat the STI.....hope the U.S. power boost is for real, that might make it as fast or faster.......like the STI
Trending Topics
Dec 11, 2007, 06:42 AM
#8
Evolved Member
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Diamond Bar, California
Posts: 3,783
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The 276hp rating in Japan is just a rating, the car probably makes the same power (or maybe more) as the US model. Actually, enough with the assumptions, we won't know the true power until these cars get on a dyno. All I know is that any dyno numbers (dynojet) that are 260+ I will be happy with, any numbers that are less than 260, I will be pretty disappointed with.
Dec 11, 2007, 07:21 AM
#10
Evolving Member
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: nc
Posts: 132
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Edmunds numbers are usually slower that other car magazines.
I think everybody needs to wait for a full test of the Evo. Pre-production cars can always be a bit slower, especially if the cars are not at 100%
Everybody is going into an emotional crisis about how slow the Evo is. With only 276 hp, I'm surprised the Evo did 4.9 sec with 25 less hp than the STI.
A US spec version will have 300. Shouldn't that be good for another few tenths and get it down to 4.7 or so?
I think everybody needs to wait for a full test of the Evo. Pre-production cars can always be a bit slower, especially if the cars are not at 100%
Everybody is going into an emotional crisis about how slow the Evo is. With only 276 hp, I'm surprised the Evo did 4.9 sec with 25 less hp than the STI.
A US spec version will have 300. Shouldn't that be good for another few tenths and get it down to 4.7 or so?
Last edited by jperryrocks; Dec 11, 2007 at 07:26 AM.
Dec 11, 2007, 09:04 AM
#11
Edmunds numbers are usually slower that other car magazines.
I think everybody needs to wait for a full test of the Evo. Pre-production cars can always be a bit slower, especially if the cars are not at 100%
Everybody is going into an emotional crisis about how slow the Evo is. With only 276 hp, I'm surprised the Evo did 4.9 sec with 25 less hp than the STI.
A US spec version will have 300. Shouldn't that be good for another few tenths and get it down to 4.7 or so?
I think everybody needs to wait for a full test of the Evo. Pre-production cars can always be a bit slower, especially if the cars are not at 100%
Everybody is going into an emotional crisis about how slow the Evo is. With only 276 hp, I'm surprised the Evo did 4.9 sec with 25 less hp than the STI.
A US spec version will have 300. Shouldn't that be good for another few tenths and get it down to 4.7 or so?
Anyway, actual HP figures for the JDM spec. Evo X's is around 295hp.
Dec 11, 2007, 02:13 PM
#12
here's a comparison on edmunds.com: Title Fight. both cars are JDM spec.
i am very impressed with this article and will wait until evo-X arive
Dec 12, 2007, 05:31 AM
#13
Evolved Member
iTrader: (14)
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Seattle & Portland
Posts: 565
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I never thought this day would come: I don't care to read an Evo/STI match. I read the first few sentences of fluff and scrolled down right through it. Ugh. These cars disappoint.
Dec 12, 2007, 07:03 AM
#14
.
